[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-16002?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16817369#comment-16817369
]
Nick Dimiduk commented on HBASE-16002:
--------------------------------------
I believe my original intent was to only expose constructors where a callerÂ
must provide their own parameters; everywhere else there are static constants
available. The idea being to help callers avoid accidental excessive
construction of these things. However, it makes for an inconsistent API, which
becomes a bit of a burden for someone who wants to generate instances
dynamically.
I'm coming around to the idea of keeping your improvement, retain the public
constructors everywhere. For me, the argument for consistency is stronger than
the argument of "protecting" the caller. [~Jan Hentschel] what do you think?
> Many DataType constructors are not public
> -----------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-16002
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-16002
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Nick Dimiduk
> Assignee: Jan Hentschel
> Priority: Major
> Attachments: HBASE-16002.master.001.patch
>
>
> Using the {{Struct}} class to build a rowkey, I noticed than many of the
> provided {{DataType}} implementations' constructors are protected. They
> should be public in most (all?) cases.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
